IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/reggov/v11y2017i4p438-450.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Institutional design of ecolabels: Sponsorship signals rule strength

Author

Listed:
  • Nicole Darnall
  • Hyunjung Ji
  • Matthew Potoski

Abstract

Ecolabels are designed to help consumers identify environmentally superior products and services; however, they are not all created equal. Some ecolabels have strong rules that promote environmental improvements, while others have weaker rules that permit free‐riding. Because information about ecolabel design and rule strength is typically not readily available at the point of purchase, consumers struggle to differentiate stronger ecolabels from weaker ones. We investigate whether ecolabel sponsorship is a signal that can help consumers distinguish between ecolabels according to the quality of their institutional design. Using data of 189 prominent ecolabels, we find that while most ecolabels have basic rules for environmental performance, monitoring, and conformance, the strength of these rules varies across labels according to sponsoring organization. Independent sponsors have the strongest ecolabel rules, followed by governments. Industry sponsored ecolabels have the weakest rule structures. Taken as a whole, these findings suggest that sponsorship may provide important information about whether an ecolabel is designed with rules that effectively condition firms to promote meaningful environmental improvements.

Suggested Citation

  • Nicole Darnall & Hyunjung Ji & Matthew Potoski, 2017. "Institutional design of ecolabels: Sponsorship signals rule strength," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 11(4), pages 438-450, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:11:y:2017:i:4:p:438-450
    DOI: 10.1111/rego.12166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1111/rego.12166
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1111/rego.12166?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Crawford, Sue E. S. & Ostrom, Elinor, 1995. "A Grammar of Institutions," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 89(3), pages 582-600, September.
    2. Irene Henriques & Bryan W. Husted & Ivan Montiel, 2013. "Spillover Effects of Voluntary Environmental Programs on Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Lessons from Mexico," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 32(2), pages 296-322, March.
    3. Thomas Lyon & A. Montgomery, 2013. "Tweetjacked: The Impact of Social Media on Corporate Greenwash," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 118(4), pages 747-757, December.
    4. Christopher Marquis & Michael W. Toffel & Yanhua Zhou, 2016. "Scrutiny, Norms, and Selective Disclosure: A Global Study of Greenwashing," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(2), pages 483-504, April.
    5. Rick Harbaugh & John W. Maxwell & Beatrice Roussillon, 2011. "Label Confusion: The Groucho Effect of Uncertain Standards," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 57(9), pages 1512-1527, February.
    6. Ebrahim, Alnoor, 2003. "Accountability In Practice: Mechanisms for NGOs," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 813-829, May.
    7. Douadia Bougherara & Gilles Grolleau, 2005. "Designing Ecolabels In Order To Mitigate Market Failures," Journal of Interdisciplinary Economics, , vol. 16(4), pages 411-430, July.
    8. Aseem Prakash & Matthew Potoski, 2012. "Voluntary environmental programs: A comparative perspective," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(1), pages 123-138, December.
    9. Prakash,Aseem & Potoski,Matthew, 2006. "The Voluntary Environmentalists," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521860413, October.
    10. Prakash,Aseem & Potoski,Matthew, 2006. "The Voluntary Environmentalists," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521677721, October.
    11. Krittinee Nuttavuthisit & John Thøgersen, 2017. "The Importance of Consumer Trust for the Emergence of a Market for Green Products: The Case of Organic Food," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 140(2), pages 323-337, January.
    12. Brown, R. & Webber, C. & Koomey, J.G., 2002. "Status and future directions of the Energy Star program," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 27(5), pages 505-520.
    13. Carolyn Fischer & Thomas P. Lyon, 2014. "Competing Environmental Labels," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(3), pages 692-716, September.
    14. Nicole Darnall & Joann Carmin, 2005. "Greener and cleaner? The signaling accuracy of U.S. voluntary environmental programs," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 38(2), pages 71-90, September.
    15. Douadia Bougherara & Gilles Grolleau, 2005. "Designing ecolabels in order to mitigate market failures: an application to agrofood products," Post-Print hal-01939943, HAL.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sofia Brito-Ramos & Maria Céu Cortez & Florinda Silva, 2022. "Do sustainability signals diverge? An analysis of labeling schemes for socially responsible investments ," Working Papers hal-04064367, HAL.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hoang, Phi Cong & McGuire, William & Prakash, Aseem, 2018. "Reducing Toxic Chemical Pollution in Response to Multiple Information Signals: The 33/50 Voluntary Program and Toxicity Disclosures," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 193-202.
    2. Mary Gugerty, 2009. "Signaling virtue: voluntary accountability programs among nonprofit organizations," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 42(3), pages 243-273, August.
    3. Yu, Ellen Pei-yi & Luu, Bac Van & Chen, Catherine Huirong, 2020. "Greenwashing in environmental, social and governance disclosures," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 52(C).
    4. Lily Hsueh & Aseem Prakash, 2012. "Incentivizing self‐regulation: Federal vs. state‐level voluntary programs in US climate change policies," Regulation & Governance, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(4), pages 445-473, December.
    5. Doremus, Jacqueline, 2020. "How does eco-label competition affect environmental benefits? The case of Central Africa's forests," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    6. Inhwan Ko & Aseem Prakash, 2022. "Signaling climate resilience to municipal bond markets: does membership in adaptation-focused voluntary clubs affect bond rating?," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(1), pages 1-19, March.
    7. Frances Bowen, 2019. "Marking Their Own Homework: The Pragmatic and Moral Legitimacy of Industry Self-Regulation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 156(1), pages 257-272, April.
    8. Erica Johnson & Aseem Prakash, 2007. "NGO research program: a collective action perspective," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 40(3), pages 221-240, September.
    9. Thi Thu Huong Nguyen & Zhi Yang & Ninh Nguyen & Lester W. Johnson & Tuan Khanh Cao, 2019. "Greenwash and Green Purchase Intention: The Mediating Role of Green Skepticism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, May.
    10. Brendan Guy, 2014. "Re-conceptualising Commitments to Sustainable Development in the 21st Century – Nurturing Action and Accountability in the Networked World," The Economic and Social Review, Economic and Social Studies, vol. 45(2), pages 223-244.
    11. Daniel Berliner & Aseem Prakash, 2014. "The United Nations Global Compact: An Institutionalist Perspective," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 122(2), pages 217-223, June.
    12. Aseem Kaul & Jiao Luo, 2018. "An economic case for CSR: The comparative efficiency of for‐profit firms in meeting consumer demand for social goods," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1650-1677, June.
    13. Johannes Urpelainen, 2011. "Frontrunners and Laggards: The Strategy of Environmental Regulation under Uncertainty," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 50(3), pages 325-346, November.
    14. Oliver Westerwinter, 2021. "Transnational public-private governance initiatives in world politics: Introducing a new dataset," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 16(1), pages 137-174, January.
    15. Yihao Guo & Yanwen Song & Yimin Wang, 2024. "Happy troubles? CSR awards and CSR report quality," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 31(4), pages 2989-3005, July.
    16. Chien‐Ming Chen & Maria J. Montes‐Sancho, 2017. "Do Perceived Operational Impacts Affect the Portfolio of Carbon‐Abatement Technologies?," Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 24(3), pages 235-248, May.
    17. Rebecca Edwards & Graham Smith & Milena Büchs, 2013. "Environmental Management Systems and the Third Sector: Exploring Weak Adoption in the UK," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 31(1), pages 119-133, February.
    18. Holtmaat, Ellen Alexandra & Adolph, Christopher & Prakash, Aseem, 2020. "The global diffusion of environmental clubs: how pressure from importing countries supports the chemical industry's Responsible Care® program," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 102658, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Kenneth Abbott & Duncan Snidal, 2010. "International regulation without international government: Improving IO performance through orchestration," The Review of International Organizations, Springer, vol. 5(3), pages 315-344, September.
    20. Bullock Graham, 2015. "Signaling the credibility of private actors as public agents: transparency, independence, and expertise in environmental evaluations of products and companies," Business and Politics, De Gruyter, vol. 17(2), pages 177-219, August.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:reggov:v:11:y:2017:i:4:p:438-450. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://doi.org/10.1111/(ISSN)1748-5991 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.